[99309] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Apple Airport Extreme IPv6 problems?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
Mon Sep 17 13:44:57 2007
In-Reply-To: <2d106eb50709171006u64dcd4cmf087d63820b10936@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "Barrett Lyon" <blyon@blyon.com>, nanog@merit.edu
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:43:48 +0200
To: Martin Hannigan <hannigan@gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 17-sep-2007, at 19:06, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> Getting back to my original discussion with Barrett, what should we do
> about naming? I initially though that segregating v6 in a subdomain
> was a good idea, but if this is truly a migration, v4 should be the
> interface segregated.
For debugging purposes, it's always good to have
blah.ipvX.example.com, but the real question is: do you feel
comfortable adding AAAA records to your production domain names?
Although I've been running that way for years and I've had only one
or two complaints during that time, I can see how someone could be
worried about reduced performance over IPv6 (it's still slower than
IPv4 a lot of the time because of tunnel detours etc) or even
timeouts when advertised IPv6 connectivity doesn't work for someone,
such as a Vista user with a public IPv4 address behind a firewall
that blocks protocol 41.
Then again, I'm guessing that few people type www.ipv6.google.com
rather than www.google.com. And with stuff like mail, where you set
up the server names once and forget about it, it's even worse.
So... I'd say: gain some experience with a service that is important
enough that people will complain when things are slow, but not
important enough that bad things happen if you don't fix the issue
for them. For instance, you could host the page with all the NOC
contact info on a domain with an AAAA record. :-)
